However, scientific tests incorporate errant assumptions. For instance, three-year old rock, from Mount St. Helen, was dated as thousands of years old. So, who’s lying?

In the 1970s, a fossil named Lucy was dated over a million years old. When another fossil, considered transitional from Lucy, was dated too close to Lucy’s age, Lucy was retested. Instantly, she was nearly 50 percent older than a day earlier. Which date is correct? They just have to protect the “theory.”

The amazing thing is how easy it is to blow apart his false beliefs about evolution and science. Five minutes of research showed that the Mt. Saint Helens dating error was due to a creationist 'scientist' who used a dating method known to be inaccurate for rocks less than 10,000 years old. Another five minutes of research showed that the two datings of Lucy were 17 years apart, with a consequent improvement in accuracy.

File under "some scientist got soemthing wrong in the past, current science corrects error, therefore all science is bad, therefore God" line of reasoning. Odd how often such a ludicrous, and I do mean ludicrous(using science to prove science bad)line a reasoning is used.

Logged

An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

I was originally going to say that of all the things that theists do, their anti-science-anti-intellectual push is probably the thing that irritates me the most.... but then I thought of ALL THE OTHER DUMB AND OPPRESSIVE SHIT they do on TOP of that and it slid down the list a bit... but its still really high.

Logged

"If we look back into history for the character of the present sects in Christianity, we shall find few that have not in their turns been persecutors, and complainers of persecution."

By that token I could take a larger rock, smash it to bits, pick up a piece and declare "Lo! I have created this rock!"

[wiki]K-Ar dating[/wiki]. Argon is normally trapped within rock, but melting it (such as in a volcano) causes it to be released; once the rock solidifies, argon starts to accumulate again from the decay of isotopic potassium, which has a very long half-life.

I agree that his statement that the rock was 'created' is dumb. But the basis of the dating method is sound...provided there have been a few thousand years since a volcano erupted.

There are four regulars who write to the Phoenix (call them the Four Musketeers, since they soldier on despite the fact that they never convince anyone of anything). Joshua Ashwood and Robert Bornfleth, who are creationists who varyingly lecture about how people should obey the injunctions in the Bible and rant about science they don't agree with, and Herb Pope and Catherine White, "birthers" who are suspicious of government.

Unfortunately, the Phoenix limits letters to 350 words, once a month, so if I write back to them, I can't say anything else for a month. And given that there are four of them and one of me...